About twenty years ago, Dr. Ed Stetzer and I worked on a church plant on the east side of Louisville, Kentucky. As the planning progressed, Ed asked me what we should name the church. I suggested Eastside Baptist Tabernacle. He rejected that immediately, and I believe he settled on River Oaks Community Church. The church plant failed because the church planter left after six months. When we evaluated the project, I told Ed it failed because he rejected the name I suggested.
From time to time the discussion arises about whether a Southern Baptist church should include Baptist in its name. In the old days, when William Thornton and I were young, there was no question. All SBC churches used Baptist in their names. For sure, those days are long gone. Still, some believe we should use “Baptist.” I’ve heard SBC leaders express strong opinions about this.
When I taught church planting at Southern Baptist Seminary, I told my students to use “Baptist” if it was an advantage and to not use it if it was a disadvantage. The experience of some of my seminary students prompted that teaching. One summer, I sent two of my students to help with a church planting project north of Detroit in Novi, Michigan. Part of their duties was to survey people in the community. They asked several questions of the residents, including one about the name “Baptist.” They found that most of the residents of Novi had a negative opinion of Baptists, viewing Baptists as harsh, negative, and legalistic. My students recommended that the new church leave “Baptist” out of its name.
Of course, many SBC churches have changed their names. First Baptist Church in Springdale, Arkansas (where Ronny Floyd was pastor) changed its name to Cross Church. First Baptist Church of Franklin, Tennessee, became People’s Church.
Today, it is difficult to discern the denomination of a church, or even if it belongs to a denomination. Several months ago, my wife and I drove to Rockwall, Texas. We passed a big church called Lakeshore Church. The facility really impressed me, and I wondered about it. It took some research on the internet to discover that it is an Assembly of God congregation. Of course, the same could be said of several new churches in our area. They are Southern Baptists, but you would have to make careful inquiry to learn that.
Well, Voices readers, what do you say about the name of an SBC church? Should it have Baptist in the name?
I think if you put, “Cross Church” in big letters and then in small letters at the bottom, “A Southern Baptist Congregation.” that would be good. Truly, having them there would have helped in your situation.
That’s a good idea!
I think it can be contextual in nature too. I don’t think in a state like Texas that having Baptist in the name would be a detriment at all. In another state out of the Bible belt, that might be a different story. I do like Craig’s idea.
If things keep going this way, the trend will soon be to remove the word “Church” from the name. Imagine names, such as, Cross Community, The New Life Experience, Faith Life, etc. It’s coming, people…
And if that isn’t enough, we could remove the pulpit, replace the pews with folding chairs, and replace hymns with cool-sounding contemporary music. –Oh, wait! that’s already been done! So then, what’s left? Maybe we could replace preaching with a pastor-directed group discussion? If we put our minds to it, there’s no telling what improvements might emerge!
There was a time when we divided by denominations and other secondary and tertiary doctrinal issues. Most people don’t hold so tightly to those differences any more, and more and more Americans are being raised with no church affiliation. I personally like church names that speak to who we are as followers of Jesus and names that don’t have to compartmentalize us so much. Don’t misunderstand, I’m thankful for my SBC heritage and I’m a part of an SBC church, but I love that we are church that seeks to have unity in the essentials, grace in the non-essentials and love permeating all we do.
Hi Jimmy, The question that always comes to my mind when hearing “unity in the essentials, grace in the non-essentials and love permeating all we do” is….who decides what the essentials and non-essentials are? Because of course, they will be different among various people, even among Christians who hold to the veracity of Scripture. Kind of like tolerance….everyone is tolerant as long as there is agreement.
Personally, I believe the word “baptist” communicates the theology of the church. I prefer to have some idea of the church’s theology before I visit there. But that’s just me.
Perhaps the church could use a name without “Baptist” but have SBC included in the name.
Here in Iowa, Baptist is not helpful, in general. It was why I supported the name change idea several years – an idea that flopped miserably.
You have trouble finding an SBC church in Iowa – in much of the country really, started in the last 20 years that a) has Baptist in the name and b) admits its denominational affiliation on its website without significant sleuthing!
Up here, the term Baptist tends to call to mind the KJV Only legalistic churches or some other less than complimentary affliliation. I haven’t tried to change our church’s name.
This has happened all over.
People who are familiar with what Baptists stand for and have had positive experiences, will not blanche. Those who don’t know what Baptists believe, or have had bad experiences, may stay away.
I helped start a church in 1992. We had 5 couples on the founding team, two of whom were not from Baptist backgrounds, but basically believed Baptist doctrine. As we held Bible studies leading up to the actual launch, we asked people what suggested names they had for the church. Almost no one suggested putting Baptist in the name. One suggestion was, “Church of the Holy Dove”. She was from a Catholic background.
We settled on a name that did not have “Baptist” in the name. This was 1992, not 2002, or 2012, or 2020. We got push back from the local association, the State Convention, and less pushback from the SBC.
It’s understandable how all of the denominations came to be after the Reformation. And it’s understandable how the distinctives of those denominations were marked by the name of the church.
Today, with the lack of understanding on the part of the public generally, and in the case of Baptists, with the confusion caused by all the variants, it’s understandable to me why new churches do not use that name.
Most people I know really long for a fellowship that seeks to project the sincerity, focus, and values of the NT church. And after all, we are followers of Jesus, first. Given that, I am less interested in preserving and projecting a denominational brand.
And so, I don’t have a strong feeling that “Baptist” must be in the name.
I do not believe, however, that affiliation with SBC and other Baptist groups should be a secret or too hard to find.
I think your advice is good–include it in the name if it is helpful. People are increasingly less concerned about denomination.
I also like an idea similar to Craig’s: put “SBC” somewhere on the sign/website. Those looking for a Southern Baptist Church will know what it means.
I can go either way on this one. What region of the country you are in probably matters a lot.
Whether we like to admit it or not, your church name is a marketing strategy. Some churches market to their current membership and you basically can’t change the name at all no matter any good reason you have for it. Denominations in the names are basically marketing to people in your own denomination (also marketing to other denominations to stay away).More general names are usually more marketing to the community.
Each church chooses who they are marketing to with their name.
At the very least the SBC affiliation of a church should be indicated on the website and brochure perhaps as an answer to the question ‘Why are we a Southern Baptist Affiliated church?’ That is what non SBCers really want to know. Also, I believe some of the single word church names (Alive, Ignite, Ignite, Happy, Your…) are just silly! They are definitely trying too hard to be cool.
Allen
I’m with you on some names.
Plus, some of them are creepy. I know of a church called Axis. If Adolf, Benito, or Tojo are members…
Then some names are designed to sound cool but aren’t. I met a guy one time who had a mullet haircut and he pastored “Contemporary Baptist Church.”
Sounds like that name came from the same group that came up with Great Commission Baptist.
Mullets are trending back in style. And the name “Contemporary Baptist Church” sounds pretty meta to me. Maybe this guy was ahead of his time.
I almost made the exact same comment about some of the names I’m seeing–it cracks me up.
Two of my favorite compliments about our church (First Baptist Church of Cornelius) came from two different new members. The one who had a Baptist background said she appreciated our church because “It is a traditional Southern Baptist Church.” The other who did not have a Baptist background said she appreciated the church because “It was not a typical Southern Baptist Church.” I presume the first found what she had experienced as a child and the second found a church contrary to her preconceptions (i.e. harsh, negative, and legalistic). What both found is who we really are – faithful, joyful, hospitable, Spirit-filled. When I came to FBCC, I made the decision to embrace our Southern Baptist heritage and to dispel the misconceptions of who were are as Baptists and followers of Jesus Christ. Rather than hiding who we are in the eyes of man, I suggest we work to show the world who we are in our union with Christ.
My guess is that church names matter most to community members who are looking for a church but have a negative experience with Baptists for some reason. I don’t think those who are completely unchurched care whether you are First Baptist or Journey or Village. But this doesn’t seem to be a moral or spiritual issue to me. Use whatever name helps you accomplish your mission, but make sure you aren’t hiding what you believe. Make information about your beliefs and denominational affiliation available somewhere on your website and materials for those who want to know.
Back in the early 1980’s my home church, located in a state that is not in the South and where Southern Baptist work did not start until the 1920’s, decided to include “Southern” in its name in order to distinguish the denominational affiliation from the First Baptist Church in town which is affiliated with the Conservative Baptist Association. It is close to a military base and has a couple of local employers based in Southern states and they wanted to make sure people who came from places where “First Baptist” and “Southern Baptist” are synonymous knew the difference. Back then, it made a difference mainly to people who moved to town from the South and were looking for a church.
Thirty some odd years down the road now, I don’t think it makes much of a difference at all. The town has more than doubled in population, but few of the new people moving in make looking for a church a priority, even those from the South. There are fewer churches in town now than there were in the 80’s and my home church, still SBC affiliated, started a cowboy church a few years ago, but the combined attendance is less than the attendance was in my home church in the 80’s.
I don’t think a church should “hide” its denominational identity if it has one. But I don’t think it necessarily needs to have Baptist in the name.
We recently changed our name from Harvard Avenue Baptist Church to Covenant Church. We do not hide our Baptist identity. Our main logo contains the line – A Southern Baptist Community – but this is not on our sign. We have seen a major increase in guest traffic since the name change. I was rather shocked by the difference it made. People make decisions based upon impressions. At least now our people get to make the first impression rather than a name.
It is appointed into to man once to die, after that the judgement. I don’t see anywhere on the Bible that God will ask what denomination we belonged to.
If you belong to an apostate ‘denomination,’ it will definitely enter into the discussion.
Nope. What we belong to has nothing to do with our entry to glory. Who we belong too, does.
I think you’ll have some ‘splainin’ to do.
In the New Testament it seems that churches were identified by their location. That’s probably a safe place to start.
We would be the Church at Winnsboro, but then there are other sister Baptist churches here too. The Church down and across from the Church at Winnsboro could be the one nearest us. LOL Just kidding a bit. I like that. Kinda cool. “The Church at Winnsboro.”